Comments on the review of Statistical Inference
-
Murray Aitkin
Abstract
It is a rare event in the statisticalworld for a book reviewto take 15 pages (plus references). The three reviewers are all eminent in the profession, and have tried to be scrupulously careful in their reviewof a bookwhosemain principle they firmly dispute as non-Bayesian, and which they find not to be useful in their work. The length of the review demonstrates the seriousnesswith which they regard the book′s approach, and the importance to them of denying its relevance to either Bayesian analysis or practical data analysis with complex data.
In responding to the authors′ review, I found it helpful to place our different views in the framework of Thomas Kuhn′s (1962) discussion of paradigm changes in science.
© by Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, München, Germany
Articles in the same Issue
- Inherent difficulties of non-Bayesian likelihood-based inference, as revealed by an examination of a recent book by Aitkin
- Comments on the review of Statistical Inference
- Loss-based risk measures
- A harmonic function approach to Nash-equilibria of Kifer-type stopping games
- A note on the biasedness and unbiasedness of two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test
Articles in the same Issue
- Inherent difficulties of non-Bayesian likelihood-based inference, as revealed by an examination of a recent book by Aitkin
- Comments on the review of Statistical Inference
- Loss-based risk measures
- A harmonic function approach to Nash-equilibria of Kifer-type stopping games
- A note on the biasedness and unbiasedness of two-sample Kolmogorov–Smirnov test
